A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
June 28, 2011
The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, June 28, 2011 at 9:00 a.m., in the Board of County Commissioners’ Meeting Room, Lake County Administration Building, Tavares, Florida. Commissioners present at the meeting were: Jennifer Hill, Chairman; Leslie Campione, Vice Chairman; Sean Parks; Jimmy Conner; and Welton G. Cadwell. Others present were: Darren Gray, County Manager; Sanford A. “Sandy” Minkoff, County Attorney; Wendy Taylor, Executive Office Manager, County Manager’s Office; and Shannon Treen, Deputy Clerk.
INVOCATION and pledge
Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney, gave the Invocation and led the Pledge of Allegiance.
Mr. Darren Gray, County Manager, requested to pull Tab 4 for discussion and place it under the County Manager’s Departmental Business.
COUNTY MANAGER’S CONSENT AGENDA
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Conner, and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the County Manager’s Consent Agenda, Tabs 1 through 5, pulling Tab 4, as follows:
Request for approval and signature of the CTD/ACHA Medicaid Non-Emergency Transportation Agreement Amendment Number 2 from July 1, 2011 through June 30, 2012. Fiscal Impact $935,702.00 (Fully Medicaid Grant Funded.)
Request for authorization to fill one (1) Survey Party Chief position in the Public Works Department/Engineering Division. (The fiscal impact is $42,362.)
Request for approval to Advertise the ordinance relating to the revision of Land Development Regulations assigning the duties of the Local Planning Agency to the Lake County Zoning Board and clarifying the establishment of a quorum. (No fiscal impact.)
Request for approval to Advertise the ordinance relating to the revision of Land Development Regulations affecting Heavy Industrial Uses adjacent to residential areas. (No fiscal impact.)
Request for approval and signature of Unanticipated Revenue Resolution (URR) No. 2011-83 for the Landfill Enterprise Fund. (Fiscal impact is $ 51,630.)
vacation petition no. 1166 – clermont
Mr. Jim Stivender, Public Works Director, explained that this was a request to vacate grading easements on Hammock Ridge Road in South Lake County. He stated that these easements were intended to be vacated at the time of platting, but because of the economic conditions in that area, the subdivision had gone through multiple owners. He noted that the current owner started developing some of the lots, and since the easements encroach on those lots, they were recommending vacating them.
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
There being no one who wished to address the Board, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
On a motion by Commr. Parks, seconded by Commr. Conner, and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the Vacation Petition No. 1166 to vacate grading easements in the Clermont area and approval and execution of Resolution No. 2011-84.
public hearings: rezoning
Mr. Brian Sheahan, Planning and Community Design Director, stated that all of the zoning cases remained on consent, and noted that case number CUP #11/6/1-3 on the rezoning regular agenda was postponed until the August 23, 2011 BCC meeting so the applicants could hold a community meeting on July 9, 2011 at 9:00 a.m. on their property. He mentioned that they sent notice of that continuance to all concerned parties.
rezoning consent agenda
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
There being no one who wished to address the Board, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
Commr. Cadwell stated that, regarding PH #10-11-5, he wanted to thank the staff for going over the top with helping the applicants get this cited and find a place where it fit, and expressed that he was very appreciative of them being proactive.
Commr. Conner mentioned that the staff has been working very hard to support business, and opined that the two newest Commissioners have also done a good job in helping them focus on getting that message out.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Campione, and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the Rezoning Consent Agenda as follows:
Tab 1. Ordinance No. 2011-31
CUP Revocation CUP #93/4/2-2
Serenby LLC – aka Selway Farms
CUP is in Agriculture (A) zoning district and allows for six (6) mobile home sites for agriculture housing and is no longer necessary as the property has been annexed into the City of Leesburg.
Tab 2. Ordinance No. 2011-32 & Ordinance No. 2011-34
Rezoning Case No. PH #12-11-2
Lake County School Board (Harry Fix)/
Francisco & Armando Alonso, Trustee/
Lake County Division of Planning and Community Design
Lake County School Board Transportation Facility
Amendment – US 27
Approve a new ordinance to replace Community Facility District (CFD) Ordinance #2011-15 to correct a scrivener’s error and to rezone a portion of the CFD property to Community Commercial (C-2).
Tab 3. Ordinance No. 2011-33
Rezoning Case No. PH #10-11-5
Gary and Peggy Custer/Brian Crawford
Dollar General at CR 44 & Emeralda Road
The Applicant is proposing a rezoning amendment to an existing Planned Commercial (CP) Ordinance (#1998-51) to allow general retail sales for a Dollar General Store.
agreement with united way for the 2-1-1 system
Mr. Gray stated that this agreement was previously discussed a couple weeks ago, and announced that Ms. Sue Cordova, President of United Way for Lake & Sumter Counties, was here today to make a presentation to clear up any misunderstandings and to answer any additional questions. He added that they would need to make some changes to the contract if the Board decided to move forward with this agreement.
Ms. Cordova explained that she did some more research to answer the question of whether there were adequate needs in the community for this service and noted that she used the 2010 Census, Florida’s Children at a Glance, Florida Power, and Sumter Electric Cooperative, Inc. (SECO) as resources for her research. She reported on her findings, noting that senior citizens represented 30.2 percent of the total population in Lake County and were the number one caller for 2-1-1 services. She specified that 10.9 percent of the residents spoke a different language than English and 14.6 percent of the residents over the age of 25 did not have at least a high school diploma. She mentioned that she verified that information with Lake Tech and found that most of those residents averaged a sixth grade education. She explained that the information on 2-1-1 was at a sixth grade level because they knew that those residents could not understand it. She added that 41 percent of the children that were registered in a public school were on free and reduced lunch, and 25 percent of births were to teenage mothers, while 46 percent of births were to Medicaid patients. She related that 13.2 percent of the households in Lake County were not equipped to have electricity and of the homes that did have electricity, 26 percent had either delinquent utility bills or were completely disconnected. She stated that they had over $100,000 for electric assistance, but they were unable to help these residents because no one was aware that there was assistance.
Commr. Conner asked why the electric companies were not telling these residents about the assistance that was available.
Ms. Cordova explained that the electric companies did give out 2-1-1 and the number for United Way; however, the electric companies were unaware that there were different agencies that had money for assistance. She noted that it was a benefit to have 2-1-1 services because they kept track of which agencies currently had money to give out. She related that their goal was to help prevent residents from going without services and noted that 2-1-1 was open 24 hours a day, seven days a week to assist these residents, whereas the electric companies were not. She mentioned that they also made changes to the contract to clarify that they would not sell any caller information, as it was never intended to be in there.
Commr. Conner stated that it looked like there was an average of 150 calls per month according to the reports and asked if that seemed correct.
Ms. Cordova replied that was correct right now, but they have done marketing to promote this new program, so those numbers have been increasing.
Commr. Campione asked if the highest number of calls were related to electric and rent assistance.
Ms. Cordova answered “yes,” and stated that those were the number one reasons for calls consistently across the state. She added that those calls would shift depending on the needs of the community, for instance, if there was a major storm or a hurricane and when the holiday season started.
Commr. Campione suggested that they give the electric companies the contact information for those other organizations that had money to help with electric assistance so they could aid those individuals in obtaining help.
Ms. Cordova pointed out that once those agencies ran out of money, the electric companies would be unaware of that, so they would continue to give out those phone numbers; however, those agencies could contact 2-1-1 to make them aware of their money situation.
Commr. Campione commented that it seemed like they could work out a system where those organizations contacted the power company directly letting them know when they were out of money.
Ms. Cordova explained that utilities included not only the power companies, but also the water companies, so there would be multiple companies that would have to be contacted.
Commr. Hill commented that they should not have to depend on each utility company; the utility companies should be calling 2-1-1. She expressed that instead of just marketing this service they really should focus on educating people on what this service was and suggested that they could advertise on the public busses.
Ms. Cordova mentioned that they were going to advertise on the Sumter County busses, but found that they could not afford the Lake County busses. She added that they first went to the service providers to make sure they knew that this type of service was out there, and noted that they have also spoken to the schools, police departments, and the Sheriff’s Office to make them aware as well. She stated that their next step was to market this by using billboards and public service announcements.
Commr. Cadwell remarked that 2-1-1 has been proven to work in other communities, and stated that this Board needed to decide whether they wanted to provide this service to their citizens. He opined that this service was a bargain at $30,000.
Commr. Conner commented that although he did not have anything to compare this to, it seemed like the expense per call was rather high because at an average of 150 calls per month it would cost them approximately $16 per call, and with an average of 200 calls per months it would cost approximately $12.50 per call.
Commr. Cadwell expressed that those calls would increase once the public knew about this service.
Commr. Parks asked if the money they were asking for would be used to pay for the marketing of this service.
Ms. Cordova clarified that the County would be paying 50 percent of the service and Wachovia would be paying the other 50 percent, whereas United Way would be funding all of the marketing.
Commr. Hill explained that this system has been around for a long time, and originally when they first started looking into it, it was too expensive, but now it has become reasonable. She added that this County had a lot of needs that were not being met and opined that they should really consider this.
Commr. Parks stated that it was a tough decision for him because he knew the value of what the system provided; however, he was not inclined to support this right now because of the additional budget cuts they were facing.
Commr. Campione mentioned that the County was in a very difficult situation right now with there being a $16 million shortfall for the next budget year and stated that the biggest question was whether this service was an absolute necessity. She expressed that they should talk to the organizations that gave referrals for this service to see if they could help fund this as well.
Commr. Hill commented that if the County did not show support for this service, those organizations would probably not feel comfortable chipping in either.
Ms. Cordova remarked that funding for the 2-1-1 service was approved by the Board in October of last year, and United Way has been funding the portion for which the County was responsible. She emphasized that they could not afford to continue paying for this service.
Commr. Hill related that this was already budgeted for this year; they just have not signed the contract yet.
Commr. Conner pointed out that they asked the Children’s Services Council to cut their budget by five percent for this fiscal year, and opined that they should fully fund the programs they were already committed to since those types of programs were very vital to the community. He explained that they should not add programs while they were cutting back on the ones they currently had, and remarked that they have spent millions of dollars helping those who were less fortunate, but at some point in time, they have to balance the budget and become fiscally responsible.
Commr. Hill commented that she has supported this service and has pushed for it for the last 10 years because she felt that it was the most efficient way of disbursing the funds from the various agencies to the individuals who really needed it.
Commr. Campione stated that since the funding was already promised to United Way and already budgeted, they needed to keep their commitment and follow through with it. She added that the statistics given today were very discouraging and thought they should continue to look deeper into the community to make sure the residents have jobs and can pay their bills. She emphasized that they should honor their obligations, but they should also come up with a different plan for the next budget cycle.
Commr. Conner remarked that he thought the budget was subject to contract approval.
Mr. Gray confirmed that was his understanding, and noted that the money was put into the budget, and the contract was coming back to the Board for approval.
Commr. Cadwell explained that this service was brought to the Board several years ago, and at that time they could not afford it because it was close to a million dollars. He related that they had expressed to United Way that it was a good program but directed them to see if they could cut the cost, and added that they finally came back with $30,000. He stated that this contract was indeed subject to Board approval, but there has been an inference to United Way that the County was on board with this service.
Commr. Parks asked for clarification of whether United Way moved forward with this with the understanding that the County would contribute as well.
Ms. Cordova replied “absolutely.”
Commr. Hill added that it was just a matter of writing the contract.
Mr. Gray commented that they did have the contract, but they would need to make some minor changes to it.
Commr. Campione emphasized that she was not inclined to support this next year, unless they could figure out a way to cut something else in order to pay for this.
Commr. Conner stated that there was no commitment on funding until they had the contract and asked why it had taken so long to get the contract.
Ms. Cordova responded that they gave the County a memorandum of understanding back in October 2010.
Mr. Gray specified that Ms. Dottie Keedy, Community Services Director, could answer that question, and also mentioned that staff had been working on the contract in the fall and it was brought before the Board in the spring.
Ms. Keedy informed the Board that they did receive the memorandum of understanding from United Way shortly after the start of the fiscal year, and noted that there had been many changes to the contract since it was first created. She explained that it was the County’s fault that this has taken so long.
Commr. Conner asked if the Board felt like they were obligated to fund this.
Commr. Parks stated that he was starting to feel that way.
Commr. Campione related that it seems as if that was the issue at this point because United Way went ahead with this service in reliance upon representations made by the Board.
Commr. Conner pointed out that he did feel some level of responsibility since the County caused the delay of this contract, and stated that the term of the contract was from November 1, 2010 to October 31, 2011, and asked if that could be agreed upon.
Ms. Cordova stated that they were fine with those dates.
Commr. Campione related that she did not want the Board to be in a position like this again in the future.
Commr. Cadwell mentioned that there was language in the agreement stating that United Way acknowledged that any future funding was not guaranteed by the County past October 31, 2011.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Hill, who passed the gavel, and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the agreement with United Way for the 2-1-1 service.
revision of land development regulations ordinance
Mr. Gray explained that this was for approval to advertise an ordinance revising part of the Land Development Regulations affecting the heavy industrial uses, and he wanted Mr. Brian Sheahan, Planning and Community Design Director, to explain this before it was advertised.
Mr. Sheahan stated that the purpose of this ordinance was to revisit the heavy industrial provisions that were enacted in 2008 to deal particularly with issues in the Arlington Ridge subdivision that was adjacent to the Rogers Industrial Park. He explained that they had a recent case where an applicant, who was already in the Rogers Industrial Park, wanted to expand their business, and that applicant was told that they would be subject to the heavy industrial use performance criteria enforced in the conditional use process. He related that one of the requirements was a 100 foot setback from the property line that was adjacent to the residential area; however, this interfered with their expansion because they wanted to build closer than 100 feet. He added that the applicant asked the staff to amend the ordinance to make it more business friendly. He then showed a map and a site plan illustrating the location of the subdivision and the proposed expansion area of the business, and noted that most of the outside activity would be on the original site and all the new activity would be within the enclosed building. He added that the applicant decided to use the City of Leesburg for the utilities, and in agreement with the residential property owners, the applicant decided to install a 50 foot setback. He then described some of the requirements of this ordinance, stating that this could only be allowed through the Conditional Use Process and required a 100 foot setback, a noise study, and limited hours of operation. He specified that it also required that the outside material must be screened, the lighting must meet the Land Development Regulations, the dust must be controlled, and a minimum 50 foot landscape buffer was required. He explained that the proposed changes to the ordinance included reducing the setback along with some language changes to the remaining criteria. He added that they also discussed an alternative approach to the ordinance, which would leave the setback at 100 feet, and would provide criteria where the Board could reduce the setback if the applicant could demonstrate that the impacts were mitigated. He commented that this approach would meet the request of the applicant of being more flexible for businesses.
Commr. Conner remarked that residents may not be happy if their neighborhoods started getting encroached upon.
Mr. Sheahan stated that this ordinance was adopted to address those situations because before enactment, there was only a 30 foot setback restriction to residential areas, whereas this ordinance required 100 feet.
Commr. Campione asked how they could be assured that the impacts of these businesses were mitigated if they reduced the setback to 50 feet.
Mr. Sheahan explained that through the conditional use process, the Board could require a greater setback than the minimum of 50 feet.
Commr. Campione noted that creating certainty was one of the most important things to do for businesses, and added that she would be supportive of leaving the setback at 100 feet, and if a business could prove to them that they could mitigate the impacts, then the Board could review those on a case by case basis. She related that they should give businesses a benchmark so they know what to expect.
Commr. Parks expressed that he was supportive of that as well since predictability was everything for a business. He also asked whether there would be potential for application delays if they decided to make this revision.
Mr. Sheahan commented that this would not decrease or increase the existing timeframes and added that there would be uncertainty if a business wanted a setback of less than 100 feet, but they would take that burden upon themselves. He noted that if the Board felt a greater setback was necessary, then that would be addressed through the conditional use process.
Commr. Conner mentioned that with the revised language, it was the best of both worlds because they were trying to be business friendly but at the same time they were protecting the nearby homeowners. He moved for approval of the alternative language.
Commr. Campione seconded the motion, and pointed out that Mr. Greg Beliveau with LPG was here, noting that he was involved with this case.
Mr. Beliveau addressed the Board, stating that the Rogers Industrial Park predated the Arlington Ridge subdivision as it has been there since the 1980’s. He noted that there were a number of parcels still available in that park, and since most of those sites were not very deep, this 100 foot setback requirement would take away up to a third of their property.
Commr. Campione pointed out that they were not trying to take away their property; they wanted those businesses to design their site plan, showing that any impacts could be mitigated, and then the Board could decide to lessen that setback.
Mr. Beliveau explained that not everyone would be satisfied, and related that they built a buffer that cost them $150,000 and took four months to complete; however, the City of Leesburg allowed them to phase it so that they did not have to build it all at once. He added that this kind of mitigation would add timeframes and uncertainty to the process because they would have to negotiate with the nearby residents to determine what would be acceptable to them.
Commr. Campione expressed that since the City of Leesburg was the jurisdiction and they approved Arlington Ridge with an industrial park already there, it would be better to put the ball in their court to decide how these impacts would be mitigated. She mentioned that there has always been the issue of whether a parcel would annex into the City of Leesburg, and then asked if that area would be covered within the Interlocal Service Boundary Agreement negotiation with them.
Mr. Minkoff responded that the draft agreement did not require any annexations and confirmed that any property owner in that area could annex even if they were not contiguous.
Mr. Beliveau commented that there were a lot of properties there that were not contiguous.
Commr. Campione opined that they could meet with the City of Leesburg to discuss this situation and explain to them that they needed to come up with a solution to create certainty so they could still promote industrial uses but also protect the neighborhood.
Mr. Beliveau stated that was one specific example, but there were others out there. He expressed that when dealing with Homeowners Associations, it was definitely not easy, not timely and there was uncertainty.
Commr. Cadwell asked if they advertised the ordinance with the alternative language, could they change it back to the original language at the time of the hearing.
Mr. Minkoff answered “no,” and explained that if they wanted to reduce the setback from 100 feet to 50 feet, that would need to be in the advertised version. He noted that they could advertise it at 50 feet, and then at the time of the hearing they could change it to 100 feet.
Commr. Cadwell suggested that the Board vote against the current motion, and vote on the original language so that they could hear from the public at the public hearings.
Commr. Hill stated that she agreed, and added that they should also require the adjoining properties to these industrial uses to have setbacks as well, and not make the businesses encumber the full 100 foot setback.
Mr. Beliveau remarked that was exactly his point, because there needed to be appropriate buffers on each side when there were conflicting land uses next to each other.
Commr. Campione explained that although they were planning for the future, they would still need to address the situations that already existed, noting that Commr. Hill made a good point because if a subdivision was developed near an industrial use that was already there, the County would require the industrial use to follow these requirements, when in fact that residential subdivision should also have to add a buffer. She asked if the Land Development Regulations provided for that.
Mr. Sheahan commented that the noise ordinance was built into the Code, and it required the new subdivision to address the impacts of the existing industrial use as part of their design.
Commr. Conner pointed out that he made the original motion and would like to move forward with it. He asked Commr. Campione if she still supported the motion.
Commr. Campione stated that she liked Commr. Cadwell’s suggestion of advertising the original language, because it would give them time to think about it and they could hear additional comments from the public and the business community.
Commr. Conner withdrew his motion and Commr. Campione withdraw her second to the motion.
Commr. Parks suggested that Mr. Sheahan provide some case examples of places in the County where this would apply.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Parks, and carried unanimously by a 5-0 vote, the Board moved approval to advertise the ordinance relating to the revision of Land Development Regulations affecting Heavy Industrial Uses adjacent to residential areas, as presented.
REPORTS – COMMISSIONER HILL – CHAIRMAN AND DISTRICT 1
meeting with school board
Commr. Hill reported that she would be meeting with the School Board this week to finalize the schedule for the Economic Development Joint Meeting on July 19, 2011, and asked Commr. Campione to attend if she was unable.
Commr. Campione confirmed that she would attend if needed.
discussion with the sheriff
Commr. Hill explained that she had not heard from the Sheriff since their last discussion, but he was very positive and was looking at his operations and his budget, and he would get back with them.
Mr. Gray commented that he had spoken with the Sheriff since then, and he would be placing the Sheriff on the July 12, 2011 agenda so he could talk with the Board. He asked if the Board approved of him inviting the Sheriff.
Commr. Hill stated that would be good.
Commr. Campione asked if the Sheriff would be presenting his proposed budget at that time.
Mr. Gray responded that was correct, and added that he would be able to answer any questions from the Board and explain some of his budget cuts as well.
meeting with the hospital districts and the hospitals
Commr. Hill reported that there would be a meeting with the hospital districts and the hospitals on July 26, 2011, and suggested that the Health Department attend as well.
reports – commissioner parks – district 2
Florida Association of Counties conference
Commr. Parks noted that he attended the Florida Association of Counties (FAC) Conference and during that conference he participated in the Florida Regional Planning Council meeting, and added that he was one of two commissioners to vote against a request for an increase in fees. He added that he was unsure how that would affect their dues towards the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council.
hgtv “my yard goes disney” show
Commr. Parks mentioned that the HGTV “My Yard Goes Disney” show that aired on June 27, 2011 at 8:00 p.m. featured a home in Clermont. He thanked the staff for quickly taking care of an easement issue, as well as some other issues, so that process could be expedited. He pointed out that it put Lake County in a good light for being business friendly.
community health center
Commr. Parks reported attending the opening of the Community Health Center in Groveland on June 27, 2011, and it was very well attended.
meeting at summit greens
Commr. Parks commented that he attended the meeting at Summit Greens, and there was a request to install a deceleration lane off of Highway 50 into the main entrance of Summit Greens, and to install a traffic light along North Hancock Road. He suggested that Clermont help fund the cost of the traffic light since that was a big expense.
capital facilities advisory committee meeting
Commr. Parks stated that the Capital Facilities Advisory Committee would be meeting on June 30, 2011, and they would have a budget presentation during that time. He stated that he would give the Board an update next week.
reports – commissioner conner – district 3
meeting at summit greens
Commr. Conner noted that he also attended the meeting at Summit Greens, and it was a very positive town meeting. He remarked that he wished the project on Highway 50 had been designed differently because they really needed the deceleration lanes on that highway. He explained that although the installation of those lanes would not be part of this project, the Department of Transportation stated that they would look into that.
management plans for public lands sites
Commr. Conner stated that he had delved more into the Lake May situation and came to the conclusion that any significant changes to the management plans should come to the Board for review before opening a public lands site. He also suggested that there should be a public hearing before opening any of these sites to receive comments or ideas from citizens.
Commr. Campione asked if there had been any changes to the management plans on the other two sites that were scheduled to open.
Mr. Gray replied “no,” and stated that they would give the Board an update on all three of those sites at the July 5, 2011 meeting.
Commr. Campione pointed out that Lake May was unique because the management plan called for a very large parking area, but at a location where a turn lane would also be required. She added that the turn lane was quite expensive, so staff found a way to do that without spending as much money. She commented that the management plan should really come back to the Board if they deviate from the original plan.
Commr. Conner expressed that he wanted to learn more about the need for the turn lane there.
Commr. Cadwell opined that with the curve there, installing a turn lane would still not make it a safe entrance.
Commr. Campione specified that after all the permanent items were done on that site, they should review the management plan to see whether they would need to choose an alternative site for a long-term parking area.
Mr. Gray mentioned that they would show the Board the whole plan next week.
REPORTS – COMMISsIONER campione – VICE CHAIRMAN & DISTRICT 4
Commr. Campione asked whether the County met the criteria for the enterprise zone, and if so, they would need to start discussing where they would designate that ten acre zone.
Mr. Gray confirmed that they did meet the criteria, adding that they would bring that information to the Board on August 2, 2011, and if the Board approved, then they would move forward with the process. He stated that they had until December 31, 2011 to apply.
Sheriff’s budget presentation
Commr. Campione asked if the Board could receive the materials from the Sheriff’s presentation before the July 12, 2011 meeting.
Mr. Gray explained that would be a request that the Chairman could make of the Sheriff.
Commr. Campione opined that they should ask for that material to have ahead of time since they would be able to ask questions. She expressed that her intention was that they could work together to find a solution to this problem.
Commr. Hill noted that she would relay that to him.
REPORTS – COMMISsIONER CADWELL – DISTRICT 5
tourist development council meeting
Commr. Cadwell reported that he attended the Tourist Development Council meeting on June 15, 2011, where they discussed the Capital Grant Program and decided to have a workshop in July to discuss the philosophy of their Board and which programs they wanted to spend that money on.
Commr. Campione asked if they could advertise that meeting so that any of them could attend, since it would be a good opportunity for the rest of the Board to listen to the discussion.
Mr. Minkoff stated that they advertise all of their meetings, so if it was a County meeting, then any Board member was free to go.
florida association of counties conference
Commr. Cadwell mentioned that he attended the Florida Association of Counties (FAC) Conference with Commr. Parks and the County Manager.
There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 10:33 a.m.
JENNIFER hill, chairman
NEIL KELLY, CLERK